# What could be, or what is



## Minnow (Jul 15, 2011)

Do you believe more in the power of what could be, or the power of what is?

How has this affected your life?


----------



## Superbird (Jul 15, 2011)

That'd probably be "what could be". "What could be" really presents an attitude of inventiveness, and a desire to create things, whereas "what is" feels like a way to just pass on a boring desk job, to live for what's there instead of what could be there, to live in the past instead of the future. 

...And I personally think that the future holds more than the past for us. With the power of what could be, you're living life. Otherwise, it's just bland repetition, and nobody wants that. Amirite?


----------



## nastypass (Jul 15, 2011)

...why is this a ticky poll, out of curiosity?


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 15, 2011)

Superbird said:


> That'd probably be "what could be". "What could be" really presents an attitude of inventiveness, and a desire to create things, whereas "what is" feels like a way to just pass on a boring desk job, to live for what's there instead of what could be there, to live in the past instead of the future.


Wow, you sure are unimaginative...


----------



## Superbird (Jul 15, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> Wow, you sure are unimaginative...


Maybe I'm stupid or maybe I was just high when I wrote that post, but o rly?


----------



## Eloi (Jul 15, 2011)

If I only looked at what is, I'd kill myself. The only nice thing about the present is that it will be superseded by the future. =P


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 15, 2011)

You seem to underestimate what is.

The world is already mind-bogglingly huge; how could you find the world as we already know it boring?


----------



## Eloi (Jul 15, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> You seem to underestimate what is.
> 
> The world is already mind-bogglingly huge; how could you find the world as we already know it boring?


What do you mean what is?

The world you were talking about doesn't exist anymore.

Its the world of 19 minutes later.

I like the world of 19 minutes later because the world of 19 minutes later is better than the world you were talking about, and the world of 20 minutes later will be better still.


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 15, 2011)

If you want to get really technical about it, there is no such thing as the present. Doesn't invalidate my point-- the world, in the moment I am posting right now, is plenty big. So big, in fact, that you wouldn't be able to experience everything that's happened in the past in one lifetime, nor ten lifetimes, nor a hundred, nor even a thousand-- the world of the past is huge, not to mention incredibly interesting.


----------



## Eloi (Jul 15, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> If you want to get really technical about it, there is no such thing as the present.  Doesn't invalidate my point--


Yes it does, as I am arguing for the future, and you thus arguing for the past if the present doesn't exist.



> the world, in the moment I am posting right now, is plenty big. So big, in fact, that you wouldn't be able to experience everything that's happened in the past in one lifetime, nor ten lifetimes, nor a hundred, nor even a thousand-- the world of the past is huge, not to mention incredibly interesting.


Its just huge and interesting, not say, "nice to life in" or "full of good people", for instance.


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 15, 2011)

What makes you think the future will be any better?


----------



## Mendatt (Jul 15, 2011)

I like them both! :3
Except for august. I hate august. :|


----------



## Eloi (Jul 15, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> What makes you think the future will be any better?


Pick any year in the past, and it will have less inventions and ideas than the present/near-future.

Most inventions and ideas are positive and benefit humanity overall, by comparing whole centuries.

Ergo, this trend will continue, and the future will always be better than the past.


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 15, 2011)

I can't wait to live in a world with even more pollution and overpopulation!!!


----------



## Eloi (Jul 16, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> I can't wait to live in a world with even more pollution and overpopulation!!!


You already live in the world like that, but I can't wait to live in a world that has found solutions to those problems, which isn't now!


----------



## Minnow (Jul 16, 2011)

Karkat Vantas said:


> What makes you think the future will be any better?


Because *I* will make it better.



Mersault said:


> ...why is this a ticky poll, out of curiosity?


I don't want to limit anyone's options.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Jul 16, 2011)

Um...what?


----------



## Harlequin (Jul 16, 2011)

What could be is only important if you can turn it into what is.


----------



## Mad MOAI (Jul 16, 2011)

For me, the power of "what could be" is very influential, usually because the "present" never happens in the way I expect it to. And usually the way the future works affects what I do. It's sort of hard to explain, I guess.


----------



## Coroxn (Jul 16, 2011)

Harlequin said:


> What could be is only important if you can turn it into what is.


That's a pretty bland, over-general statement. You're pretty much debunking all of fiction, 90% of music and all non-documentary films as unimportant. And I couldn't disagree more. Us humans aren't a 'what is' kind of people. Even grounded, productive people take 'what could be' and apply it to 'what is', to make something that wasn't either, but entirely new. We are a imaginative, creative species, and that is as, or even more, important as reality.


----------



## Karkat Vantas (Jul 16, 2011)

Coroxn said:


> That's a pretty bland, over-general statement. You're pretty much debunking all of fiction, 90% of music and all non-documentary films as unimportant. And I couldn't disagree more. Us humans aren't a 'what is' kind of people. Even grounded, productive people take 'what could be' and apply it to 'what is', to make something that wasn't either, but entirely new. We are a imaginative, creative species, and that is as, or even more, important as reality.


"Fiction, 90% of all music and all non-documentary films" are all things that qualify as what is. They're fictional, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.


----------



## Minnow (Jul 16, 2011)

Remember, I didn't ask which was more important; I asked which do you believe has more power.

It's true that it's important to recognize what already exists, but it's equally important to recognize the power of what could be and what might happen and how it influences human decisions.

EDIT: 





			
				karkat vantas said:
			
		

> ...are all things that qualify as what is.


Yes, but what I think Coroxn means is that all those things are people portraying or commenting on what could be. Yes, the pokemon games exist, but the pokemon world doesn't; the games just portray a place that cpuld be.


----------



## ignore_this_acct (Jul 17, 2011)

What could be, because just about everything in the world can be changed.


----------



## Autumn (Jul 17, 2011)

what could be, because the realm of what could be holds so many more fascinating ideas and inventions than what is.

don't get me wrong, the ideas of what could be don't mean anything in the practical sense unless they're what is, but what is wouldn't exist without what could be. what are we without imagination?


----------



## The Omskivar (Jul 17, 2011)

What could be.  What is cannot be changed, and it's a concrete factual concept.  What could be is imaginative and malleable, completely up to the observer (though 'what is' is also this, to an extent).

It's also a lot easier for most people to speculate and hope for the future than to accept the present.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Jul 17, 2011)

Seriously, what the hell are you guys talking about?


----------



## Minnow (Jul 17, 2011)

What is confusing?


----------



## ultraviolet (Jul 17, 2011)

Grimdour said:


> Seriously, what the hell are you guys talking about?


presumably: do you focus your life on what _could be_ (that is, the future) or_ what is_ (the present). It could have been worded a little less ambiguously, though - 'the power of what is/what could be' does sound like it's trying very hard to sound 'deep'.

I... don't understand how anyone can really 'believe' in the power of just one of them but not the other. ?_? you can't solely live in the future or the present; if you live in the future, you obviously need to consider ways to realistically get what you want, and if you live in the present, your future's going to be pretty unrewarding if you don't consider the future and aim for something. :| there's no point ~believing in the power of what could be~ if I can't start changing things with ~the power of what is~ so I can get the things I want? I don't get this question. It's so ridiculously general and nonspecific that you can't really answer it properly. 

additionally, if you're not independent enough to be able to fully take control over your own present (for example, if you're still at school, living with your parents) then... this question becomes kind of irrelevant unless you think about it on a small scale.




Coroxn said:


> That's a pretty bland, over-general statement.  You're pretty much debunking all of fiction, 90% of music and all  non-documentary films as unimportant. And I couldn't disagree more. Us  humans aren't a 'what is' kind of people. Even grounded, productive  people take 'what could be' and apply it to 'what is', to make something  that wasn't either, but entirely new. We are a imaginative, creative  species, and that is as, or even more, important as reality.


What? is it just me or have you ... misinterpreted what Harle actually meant? When did he say anything about fiction/music etc? I thought he just meant that it's kind of silly to want things if you can't realistically make them part of your present; I can wish for unicorns all I want, but it's not really going to happen, is it? wanting to write about things that aren't real isn't the same as (realistically) wanting things that aren't real, no?

It's pointless to set goals you know you can't meet; it's unhealthy and it sets ridiculous expectations upon yourself.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Jul 17, 2011)

Okay, so this is about whether I aim for the future or focus on the present.

I can't have one without the other. In order to aim for the future I want, I have to focus on the present I'm in.


----------



## Minnow (Jul 17, 2011)

I didn't mean to sound ambiguous or pretentious; I was just trying to be concise.

Also, I didn't say you only had to believe in one of them, just which do you give more weight.

As for whether or not you can 'believe' in either of them, it's obvious to me. Either thing can affect people and drive change in the world, and basically guide the life experiences of every human being. It's generally accepted that humans are set apart by the scope of their imagination, which is what allows us to think of what could be, whereas most animals only deal with what is. When I ask which you believe in more, I'm asking whether the existing world or the potential world holds more stock in your mind towards guiding your own life and that of others. Are you more human or animal?

And as for the bit about it being irrelevant if you not independant, I couldn't disagree more not only does the way you live your life as a child affect your future directly (ie, grades, scholarships, family relations, connections) but affects you mentally as well. Your attitude towards life is generated and often cemented during those years, and what you believe in then can echo across your whole life. It doesn't matter if you can't do much to practically explore your potential; it still matters inside.

And, lastly, I don't think it's pointless at all to set extremely high goals; how else will you ever find out how far you can go unless you aim for the top? Also, theres a difference between setting goals.and wishing. Yes, if you wish for unicorns, it's astoundingly unlikely that any will appear. But if you set your life goal as to create a unicorn (idfk how, maybe study biology and try to cross a horse with a narwhal or something. The point is it's your job, as the setter of your goal, to iron out details like that), not much is stopping you.

If you couldn't tell, I'm not a very practical person.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Jul 17, 2011)

I'd say I'm equal, because I always think that in order for my future, the future I want, to take shape, I have to focus on what is. Basically, I want to shape what could be, so I focus on what is. If I gave one more weight than the other, it would be very wrong for me to do so because without my future aim, then what's the point of the present? And vice versa; I can't just aim for the future and not do anything now. As I've read somewhere, the future is what the past throws back.


----------



## Coroxn (Jul 18, 2011)

ultraviolet said:


> What? is it just me or have you ... misinterpreted what Harle actually meant? When did he say anything about fiction/music etc? I thought he just meant that it's kind of silly to want things if you can't realistically make them part of your present; I can wish for unicorns all I want, but it's not really going to happen, is it? wanting to write about things that aren't real isn't the same as (realistically) wanting things that aren't real, no?
> 
> It's pointless to set goals you know you can't meet; it's unhealthy and it sets ridiculous expectations upon yourself.


He stated that what could be was only important if it could be turned into what is. This works for things like my writing career-I can imagine being published all I like, but unless I buckle down and write a book, it's not going to happen. But it doesn't work for say, Harry Potter-that will never be real. But it has sparked creativity in a great number of people. My friend and I can trace our fondness of writing back to those books, and being a writer is one of the most important things about me.

So, sometimes imagination for imagination's sake is important, as imagination can affect people in profound ways, like inspiring a career or changing a lifestyle.


----------



## Butterfree (Jul 18, 2011)

Hrm. I'm a very what-could-be-oriented person, in that I tend to spend most of my time thinking about fiction, hypotheticals and future plans rather than things that are actually happening right now. However, you seem to be asking about power to affect the real world, which to me _isn't the point_ of what-could-be. I prefer fiction that is purely constructed to stimulate minds with an imaginary scenario of events over fiction that's made explicitly to convey some sort of a message or change how people behave in the real world, for instance. So it's _not_ that I think what could be has more "power".

I actually think it might be more interesting to ask about that distinction: if we count everything aimed at actually affecting what is on the what-is side, are you a what-could-be or a what-is person? I think then a lot of people currently counting themselves on the what-could-be side would switch, but I actually wouldn't. Which isn't to say I dismiss reality as unimportant (which would be nuts), but that that I care _very_ deeply about fiction for fiction's sake, more so than I care about a lot of real-world issues I care about.


----------

